P&O Cruises say they will introduce the 2001 built Royal Princess of 30,300 gross tons on the UK market as Adonia in 2011, the same year as the currently smallest unit of the fleet, the 44,588 gross ton Artemis that was built in 1984, bows out to assume a new lease of life in Germany.
This is good news - on two accounts. Firstly, it means that the largest cruise brand in the UK will retain one small ship in its fleet of seven ships. Next April, the company will introduce the 115,000 gross ton Azura that is currently under construction in Italy: this is a slightly modified version of the 2008 built Ventura and the second Post-Panamax ship in the P&O Cruises' fleet. The news about the sale of Artemis suggested that the company might opt for operating large vessels only, while the decision to introduce Adonia means that this will clearly not be the case.
Secondly, the time is right for Artemis to go. When built as the original Royal Princess of Princess Cruises in 1984, the ship was hailed as revolutionary as a quarter of its 600 cabins had a private balcony. Indeed, the ship set a benchmark in design of layout that is used in most vessels under construction even today, a quarter of a century later.
However, while the cabins on Artemis are better than on virtually any other ship built at that time and certainly if compared to vessels of the same size, the public rooms have always been a weak spot of that ship.
When introducing Artemis, P&O Cruises wanted a ship that has a small ship feel after it had sold the Victoria of 28,891 gross ton in 2002 that had started life as Kungsholm in 1966. In terms of size, Artemis was not at all a bad choice. However, with just a show lounge forward, a secondary lounge in the stern and a two deck atrium with an admittedly very nice bar midships on its principal deck of public rooms, it never had any feling of cosiness. Rather, the large but low public rooms have an awful lot in common with cruise ferries built for Baltic trades at the same time by the same Finnish yard that produced Artemis.
Adonia, meanwhile, is one of the eight R-class vessels built in France for the now defunct Renaissance Cruises at the turn of the millennium. The interiors in general and the public rooms in particular, by the Scottish architect McNeece, are hugely superior to those on Artemis. Perhaps inspired by the film Titanic that was released when these ships were on the drawing board, McNeece created elegant fin-de-siecle interiors that had not been seen on a new ship for decades. In fact, the style that sought inspiration from historic country houses and grand hotels of the Victorian era had gone out of fashion already in 1927, when the French Line introduced Ile de France, one of the first and certainly one of the grandest ships with Art Deco interiors.
Adonia has the feeling of cosiness that P&O Cruises want to offer: the choice of public rooms is better, they are of far superior design, including an outstandinly elegant library that has a dome that gives it double deck height. Add gym and spa facilities that are surprisinly extensive for a ship of that size, this should be precisely the right kind of ship P&O Cruises need for this particular segment of the market.
The decision to introduce Adonia is a welcome one: I am personally interested in sailing on this ship in due time.
Wednesday 9 December 2009
Monday 7 December 2009
On the secular religion of global warming
This afternoon, I happened to listen to a news broadcast of a commercialradio station in the UK. In a report on the UN conference on global warming that starts in Copenhagen today, they interviewed a female delegate, who sobbed in tears that she hopes for concrete results from the conference for the sake of her children.
If proposals already made by IMO, the UN's maritime organisation, will go through as planned, from 2016 onwards, ships trading in a region that starts at the mouth of the English Channel and covers the North Sea and the Baltic, must switch to use bunkers with lower sulphur contents than what are used today. That will cost almost twice as much as the current bunkers. In my native Finland, this will add 700 million euro to the annual transport costs of the industry. Clearly, the female delegate should see concrete results from efforts to tackle global warming well within her lifetime.
Of course, 700 million euro is a cheap price to pay if the other alternative is the destruction of all life an earth due to global warming. However, that is far from sure. While I shall not dwell much deeper in why I do not believe in global warming as it is presented to the public, I shall dwell a bit on the implications of these alleged changes.
This weekend, a British government minister called skeptcis of global warming "flat earth people," i.e. reactionaries who cannot see the light of truth. From my univerisity days I recall that skepticism should lead all science. Not here: theories backing global warming have become a subject that are beyond criticism. A fundamentalist doctrine has been adopted by Her Majesty's government, which at the same same time is deploying 500 more of Her Majesty's forces to fight fundamentalism of another kind in Afghanistan.
If the proposals tabled by IMO do take effect as planned, then ports like Hamburg, Rotterdam and Antwerp may see significant drop in business, while ones like Liverpool and Lisbon that are outside the region in question could benefit even significantly.
So, why have things gone this deplorable way? I do not have a complete answer to this, but what I can say is that the media has helped a great deal. As the example of the female delegate in Copenhagen shows, reporting facts has not mattered to the media for a long time. Rather, what stirs up emotion is news.
Computer generated images of disasters caused by global warming are very televisual. And as the internet is causing the break up of audiences in the more traditional form of the electronic media and sharp falls in newspaper sales, no wonder they look for topics that grab the public's attention and stir up emotion. Fear is a strong emotion and fits this purpose very well. It, quite simply, helps the media houses to remain in business.
Swine flu is another example of this. It too has a maritime link: both Richard Fain and Micky Arison counted the cost of the outbreak as cruise passengers took fright and did not turn up. And again, the media carried reports that reminded the public of the Spanish flu that killed millions in 1918-19.
We have not seen such death rates in case of the swine flu and it may well be that we never will. But the media has had a field day with this topic as well.
These are interesting times, to say the least! While I do not believe in global warming as it is presented by theorists, I do believe that people have a need for some kind of religion. Since the 16th century, science gradually eroded the position Christianity had enjoyed in the minds of Europeans for the previous 1500 years.
Global warming has become a matter that falls into the category of religion rather than that of science. A commuter that cycles to work past a wind farm is a prophet of salvation, while another commuter, this time in a SUV driving alone in his car past a conventional power station, is a prophet of the devil.
Theory of global warming has turned from science to a secular religion. Why? Because there is money in fear - of global warming, swine flu, the millennium bug, the prophesies of the Club of Rome...
If proposals already made by IMO, the UN's maritime organisation, will go through as planned, from 2016 onwards, ships trading in a region that starts at the mouth of the English Channel and covers the North Sea and the Baltic, must switch to use bunkers with lower sulphur contents than what are used today. That will cost almost twice as much as the current bunkers. In my native Finland, this will add 700 million euro to the annual transport costs of the industry. Clearly, the female delegate should see concrete results from efforts to tackle global warming well within her lifetime.
Of course, 700 million euro is a cheap price to pay if the other alternative is the destruction of all life an earth due to global warming. However, that is far from sure. While I shall not dwell much deeper in why I do not believe in global warming as it is presented to the public, I shall dwell a bit on the implications of these alleged changes.
This weekend, a British government minister called skeptcis of global warming "flat earth people," i.e. reactionaries who cannot see the light of truth. From my univerisity days I recall that skepticism should lead all science. Not here: theories backing global warming have become a subject that are beyond criticism. A fundamentalist doctrine has been adopted by Her Majesty's government, which at the same same time is deploying 500 more of Her Majesty's forces to fight fundamentalism of another kind in Afghanistan.
If the proposals tabled by IMO do take effect as planned, then ports like Hamburg, Rotterdam and Antwerp may see significant drop in business, while ones like Liverpool and Lisbon that are outside the region in question could benefit even significantly.
So, why have things gone this deplorable way? I do not have a complete answer to this, but what I can say is that the media has helped a great deal. As the example of the female delegate in Copenhagen shows, reporting facts has not mattered to the media for a long time. Rather, what stirs up emotion is news.
Computer generated images of disasters caused by global warming are very televisual. And as the internet is causing the break up of audiences in the more traditional form of the electronic media and sharp falls in newspaper sales, no wonder they look for topics that grab the public's attention and stir up emotion. Fear is a strong emotion and fits this purpose very well. It, quite simply, helps the media houses to remain in business.
Swine flu is another example of this. It too has a maritime link: both Richard Fain and Micky Arison counted the cost of the outbreak as cruise passengers took fright and did not turn up. And again, the media carried reports that reminded the public of the Spanish flu that killed millions in 1918-19.
We have not seen such death rates in case of the swine flu and it may well be that we never will. But the media has had a field day with this topic as well.
These are interesting times, to say the least! While I do not believe in global warming as it is presented by theorists, I do believe that people have a need for some kind of religion. Since the 16th century, science gradually eroded the position Christianity had enjoyed in the minds of Europeans for the previous 1500 years.
Global warming has become a matter that falls into the category of religion rather than that of science. A commuter that cycles to work past a wind farm is a prophet of salvation, while another commuter, this time in a SUV driving alone in his car past a conventional power station, is a prophet of the devil.
Theory of global warming has turned from science to a secular religion. Why? Because there is money in fear - of global warming, swine flu, the millennium bug, the prophesies of the Club of Rome...
Monday 16 November 2009
Uncertainty over NCL group's finances beyond 12 months' time
One of the two companies that own NCL Corporation (NCLC), which again comprises Norwegian Cruise Line and NCL America, warns that they are not sure that NCLC will be able to meet its obligations after a yeasr from here. That is a bit scary, but before proceeding, here is the actual text issued by Genting Hong Kong:
"We believe our cash on hand, expected future operating cash inflows, additional borrowings under existing credit facilities and our ability to issue debt securities or raise additional equity, including capital contributions, will be sufficient to fund operations, debt payment requirements, capital expenditures and maintain compliance with covenants under our debt agreements over the next twelve-month period. There is no assurance that cash flows from operations and additional financings will be available in the future to fund our future obligations."
Well, you could say that who can tell the future - apart from the so called climate experts, who do not seem to show any degree of humility when it comes to the reliability of their 100 year weather forecasts.
Anyway, the future of NCLC could turn out choppy after the next 12 months, for which the company has the financing in place to take delivery of Norwegian Epic and to meet its other financial commitments as well.
The development of the US economy, for which NCLC depends on more than the other three cruise majors, is obviously a crucial factor to get falling yields back to a rising track. Indeed, there is indication that the worst is over for the global economy, which bodes well for NCLC's efforts.
The NCLC fleet now comprises only modern tonnage, which has hardly ever been the case before, and the beefed up Freestyle Cruising concept has strengthened the image of the NCL brand by differentiating it clearly from competing offerings. That is good news too.
But if - and indeed this is just an if at this point - NCLC failed to honour its obligations some time after the end of 2010, what then? If comparisons drawn from container and dry bulk sectors of cargo shipping are anything like justified as they most likely would be, it seems highly unlikely that NCLC would go bankrupt even in a worst case scenario. Why not? Well, for the same simple reason that has kept many a troubled container line and dry bulk shipping company afloat despite the fact that they have breached loan covenants and missed repayments of debt.
Banks do not want to became shipping companies, nor would they want to turn to a cruise line. Consequently, should NCLC run into trouble in the future, the likeliest way out would be a rescue package, e.g. in the form of a debt to equity swap. This would give NCLC's financiers a significant, perhaps even controlling interest in the company. However, it could continue trading as normal and at some point, after some restructuring, the banks could quite simply sell their shares.
Unlike container and dry bulk shipping, the cruise industry is highly consolidated and there is no structural overcapacity, which is a major worry - probably for several years to come - in both of the two sectors of cargo shipping.
With a modern, harmonious fleet NCLC should be able to capitalise well on a recovery of the cruise industry. It would be a great shame to see the worst case scenario to materialise. Anyway, one more question remains: how come the NCL group has never produced strong ,consistent profits like its competitors? It has suffered from some kind of an issue for too long.
Introduction of the SS Norway in 1980 has been hailed as triumph, but I would say it was a mistake of strategic importance. Unlike Royal Caribbean and Carnival Cruise Lines, NCL was not able to build a consistent fleet until it axed the last obsolete ships last year. You have to learn to walk before you can run, a fact that both Royal Caribbean and Carnival understood, but which NCL failed to grasp. This had a crippling effect on its prospects for two decades.
Then, in the middle of the current decade, came the NCL America adventure that was the biggest strategic failure of any major cruise company in the past 10 years, if indeed not more. Lots of capital and other resources were pumped into a project that failed on almost every account, leading to dramatic downsizing of the NCL America brand to just one from three ships. This again took up further resources at the Miami headquarters.
All these are matters of the past now. Today, NCLC has a good fleet, a strong brand and these should provide it with a platform on which to prosper.
"We believe our cash on hand, expected future operating cash inflows, additional borrowings under existing credit facilities and our ability to issue debt securities or raise additional equity, including capital contributions, will be sufficient to fund operations, debt payment requirements, capital expenditures and maintain compliance with covenants under our debt agreements over the next twelve-month period. There is no assurance that cash flows from operations and additional financings will be available in the future to fund our future obligations."
Well, you could say that who can tell the future - apart from the so called climate experts, who do not seem to show any degree of humility when it comes to the reliability of their 100 year weather forecasts.
Anyway, the future of NCLC could turn out choppy after the next 12 months, for which the company has the financing in place to take delivery of Norwegian Epic and to meet its other financial commitments as well.
The development of the US economy, for which NCLC depends on more than the other three cruise majors, is obviously a crucial factor to get falling yields back to a rising track. Indeed, there is indication that the worst is over for the global economy, which bodes well for NCLC's efforts.
The NCLC fleet now comprises only modern tonnage, which has hardly ever been the case before, and the beefed up Freestyle Cruising concept has strengthened the image of the NCL brand by differentiating it clearly from competing offerings. That is good news too.
But if - and indeed this is just an if at this point - NCLC failed to honour its obligations some time after the end of 2010, what then? If comparisons drawn from container and dry bulk sectors of cargo shipping are anything like justified as they most likely would be, it seems highly unlikely that NCLC would go bankrupt even in a worst case scenario. Why not? Well, for the same simple reason that has kept many a troubled container line and dry bulk shipping company afloat despite the fact that they have breached loan covenants and missed repayments of debt.
Banks do not want to became shipping companies, nor would they want to turn to a cruise line. Consequently, should NCLC run into trouble in the future, the likeliest way out would be a rescue package, e.g. in the form of a debt to equity swap. This would give NCLC's financiers a significant, perhaps even controlling interest in the company. However, it could continue trading as normal and at some point, after some restructuring, the banks could quite simply sell their shares.
Unlike container and dry bulk shipping, the cruise industry is highly consolidated and there is no structural overcapacity, which is a major worry - probably for several years to come - in both of the two sectors of cargo shipping.
With a modern, harmonious fleet NCLC should be able to capitalise well on a recovery of the cruise industry. It would be a great shame to see the worst case scenario to materialise. Anyway, one more question remains: how come the NCL group has never produced strong ,consistent profits like its competitors? It has suffered from some kind of an issue for too long.
Introduction of the SS Norway in 1980 has been hailed as triumph, but I would say it was a mistake of strategic importance. Unlike Royal Caribbean and Carnival Cruise Lines, NCL was not able to build a consistent fleet until it axed the last obsolete ships last year. You have to learn to walk before you can run, a fact that both Royal Caribbean and Carnival understood, but which NCL failed to grasp. This had a crippling effect on its prospects for two decades.
Then, in the middle of the current decade, came the NCL America adventure that was the biggest strategic failure of any major cruise company in the past 10 years, if indeed not more. Lots of capital and other resources were pumped into a project that failed on almost every account, leading to dramatic downsizing of the NCL America brand to just one from three ships. This again took up further resources at the Miami headquarters.
All these are matters of the past now. Today, NCLC has a good fleet, a strong brand and these should provide it with a platform on which to prosper.
Friday 13 November 2009
Something is fundamentally wrong with Finnish shipbuilding
Something is badly wrong with Finnish shipbuilding: it appears to plunge from one crisis to another, both in good times as well as bad ones.
Throughout the years, the yards there have been able to build spectacular vessels, the latest example of which is Oasis of the Seas. However, what the various owners of the three yards that are all owned by STX Europe today have not been able to do is to run them smoothly.
Two decades ago, in the autumn of 1989, a company called Wartsila Marine Industries (WMI) went bankrupt. It owned the yards in Helsinki and Turku. It had a huge orderbook, including two 58,000 gross ton cruise ferries for partners of Silja Line and three 70,000 gross ton Fantasy class cruise ships for Carnival Cruise Lines.
The Soviet trade that had kept the yards busy was on the wane and just two years after this, the Soviet Union itself would collapse. Against this background , the management of WMI had taken orders, such as the Carnival one, knowing fully well that they can only make money if they can significantly increase productivity.
Nothing of that sort would happen, indeed militant unions preferred to carry out their old practises by extending workers' weekend by endless short strikes. This combined with an unworkable target to raise productivity was largely to blame for the collapse of WMI.
Early in 1990, a new company was erected on the ruins of WMI, mainly by Martin Saarikangas, who became its ceo and Ted Arison, founder of Carnival. It was based on a conversion of debt to equity: the customers of WMI that had claims against the company simply swapped the claims for shares in the new company. The move was a brilliant one, if not unique in similar situations in other industries.
In the early 1990s, the shipping company shareholders of Masa Yards, as the new company was called, sold their shares to Kvaerner, the Norwegian engineering group that was rapidly expanding its portfolio of shipyards. Throughout the decade, Kvaerner Masa-Yards (KMY) was a highly successful builder of cruise liners.
However, a new crisis emerged in the turn of the millennium, when KMY was building a quintet of 137,000 gross ton Voyager class cruise liners for Royal Caribbean International (RCI). In line with industry practise, RCI would pay 80% of the contract price on delivery of each vessel. However, KMY would have to pay its staff, contractors and suppliers at a quicker pace, which meant that the company and the entire Kvaerner group then faced a huge need for working capital. The situation became so bad that KMY actually sold some of the building contracts to banks to get some cash.
As the new millennium progressed and the working capital crisis disappeared from the agenda, a new crisis started to build up at what was now called Aker Yards Finland (AYF). Kvaerner had exited shipbuilding after the working capital fiasco and a disastrous acquisition of Trafalgar House, then e.g. parent of Cunard Line.
The Aker group, which already owned the yard in Rauma, acquired KMY and for some time, everything seemed to go quite well. Then, roughly in the middle of the decade, AYF started to take on huge numbers of orders for ferries, mainly from Tallink but also from Brittany Ferries and Color Line. At the same time, it was building the final Voyager class and later the extended version of that design that was to be known as the Freedom class ships for RCI.
Early in 2007, Aker chairman Kjell Inge Rokke, a former fisherman turned billionaire, offloaded the Aker group's 40% stake in Aker Yards (AKY), which was the Oslo-listed parent of AYF. Soon STX stepped in, first by acquiring Aker's 40% and in the following year, making a full bid for AKY, whose portfolio of cruise ship yards also included the former Chantiers de l'Atlantique yard in France.
The years 2007 and 2008 were not good for Aker Yards: their orderbook was too big and both the yard itself and its suppliers and contractors struggled to keep up with delivery dates and in the case of many ferries, failed to meet them. The group booked heavy one-off charges against these problems.
Rumours started to circulate that Yrjo Julin, the Finnish head of AYF, had been encouraged by Rokke to fill the orderbooks and thereby boost the share price of AKY so that he could get the highest possible price for his shares.
Last year, the situation started to change quickly: ship after another was delivered without new orders being won apart that for two 49,000 gross ton ferries for P&O Ferries. Today, the Turku yard only has Allure of the Seas and the Rauma one the two P&O Ferries' newbuildings on its orderbook.
To sum up: why does the Finnish shipbuilder, whatever its name, go through these seemingly endless difficulties in both good times as bad?
Surely e.g. Meyer Werft in Germany needs to look at working capital and try to maintain a stable workoload throughout an economic cycle as well. Yet we have not heard of any of such problems from the quarters of that company.
Could it be that Finland is a nation of engineering to such a degree that apart from getting the physical product right, other aspects of the business matter little?
As a native of that country that has lived out of there for the past 12 years, it sounds like a credible explanation to a certain degree.
Throughout the years, the yards there have been able to build spectacular vessels, the latest example of which is Oasis of the Seas. However, what the various owners of the three yards that are all owned by STX Europe today have not been able to do is to run them smoothly.
Two decades ago, in the autumn of 1989, a company called Wartsila Marine Industries (WMI) went bankrupt. It owned the yards in Helsinki and Turku. It had a huge orderbook, including two 58,000 gross ton cruise ferries for partners of Silja Line and three 70,000 gross ton Fantasy class cruise ships for Carnival Cruise Lines.
The Soviet trade that had kept the yards busy was on the wane and just two years after this, the Soviet Union itself would collapse. Against this background , the management of WMI had taken orders, such as the Carnival one, knowing fully well that they can only make money if they can significantly increase productivity.
Nothing of that sort would happen, indeed militant unions preferred to carry out their old practises by extending workers' weekend by endless short strikes. This combined with an unworkable target to raise productivity was largely to blame for the collapse of WMI.
Early in 1990, a new company was erected on the ruins of WMI, mainly by Martin Saarikangas, who became its ceo and Ted Arison, founder of Carnival. It was based on a conversion of debt to equity: the customers of WMI that had claims against the company simply swapped the claims for shares in the new company. The move was a brilliant one, if not unique in similar situations in other industries.
In the early 1990s, the shipping company shareholders of Masa Yards, as the new company was called, sold their shares to Kvaerner, the Norwegian engineering group that was rapidly expanding its portfolio of shipyards. Throughout the decade, Kvaerner Masa-Yards (KMY) was a highly successful builder of cruise liners.
However, a new crisis emerged in the turn of the millennium, when KMY was building a quintet of 137,000 gross ton Voyager class cruise liners for Royal Caribbean International (RCI). In line with industry practise, RCI would pay 80% of the contract price on delivery of each vessel. However, KMY would have to pay its staff, contractors and suppliers at a quicker pace, which meant that the company and the entire Kvaerner group then faced a huge need for working capital. The situation became so bad that KMY actually sold some of the building contracts to banks to get some cash.
As the new millennium progressed and the working capital crisis disappeared from the agenda, a new crisis started to build up at what was now called Aker Yards Finland (AYF). Kvaerner had exited shipbuilding after the working capital fiasco and a disastrous acquisition of Trafalgar House, then e.g. parent of Cunard Line.
The Aker group, which already owned the yard in Rauma, acquired KMY and for some time, everything seemed to go quite well. Then, roughly in the middle of the decade, AYF started to take on huge numbers of orders for ferries, mainly from Tallink but also from Brittany Ferries and Color Line. At the same time, it was building the final Voyager class and later the extended version of that design that was to be known as the Freedom class ships for RCI.
Early in 2007, Aker chairman Kjell Inge Rokke, a former fisherman turned billionaire, offloaded the Aker group's 40% stake in Aker Yards (AKY), which was the Oslo-listed parent of AYF. Soon STX stepped in, first by acquiring Aker's 40% and in the following year, making a full bid for AKY, whose portfolio of cruise ship yards also included the former Chantiers de l'Atlantique yard in France.
The years 2007 and 2008 were not good for Aker Yards: their orderbook was too big and both the yard itself and its suppliers and contractors struggled to keep up with delivery dates and in the case of many ferries, failed to meet them. The group booked heavy one-off charges against these problems.
Rumours started to circulate that Yrjo Julin, the Finnish head of AYF, had been encouraged by Rokke to fill the orderbooks and thereby boost the share price of AKY so that he could get the highest possible price for his shares.
Last year, the situation started to change quickly: ship after another was delivered without new orders being won apart that for two 49,000 gross ton ferries for P&O Ferries. Today, the Turku yard only has Allure of the Seas and the Rauma one the two P&O Ferries' newbuildings on its orderbook.
To sum up: why does the Finnish shipbuilder, whatever its name, go through these seemingly endless difficulties in both good times as bad?
Surely e.g. Meyer Werft in Germany needs to look at working capital and try to maintain a stable workoload throughout an economic cycle as well. Yet we have not heard of any of such problems from the quarters of that company.
Could it be that Finland is a nation of engineering to such a degree that apart from getting the physical product right, other aspects of the business matter little?
As a native of that country that has lived out of there for the past 12 years, it sounds like a credible explanation to a certain degree.
Wednesday 4 November 2009
Life after Oasis
The cruise industry has made a lot of noise about the introduction of Royal Caribbean International's (RCI) Oasis of the Seas, which at 225,000 gross tons is by far the largest cruise liner ever built. Obviously, the industry has every reason to tout the new ship - a sister will enter service late next year - not only because of its size, but also due to the many new features it introduces.
Still, it is also obvious to ask what next? In addition to Allure of the Seas, the second Oasis class newbuilding, the Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd (RCCL) group has three 122,000 gross ton newbuildings due for its Celebrity Cruises brand. Meanwhile, the Madrid-based Pullmantur subsidiary of the group seems to live a life of its own: ships are moved from one market to another and the future of the Croisieres de France brand remains in doubt, at least as far as rumours are concerned.
But let us go back to RCCL proper: an industry source says that talks are in progress over a possible third Oasis class ship as well as a fourth 158,400 gross ton Freedom class unit for RCI. An option for the fourth ship has been held at STX Europe in Finland for a long time.
What will hapeen in case of these two depends on two things, the source says. First one is price and the second one is what kind of risks RCCL shareholders are willing to take. The global economy appears to be regaining some health again, which is obviously good news. This combined with the hope that Oasis of the Seas will prove to be the success it is expected to be would obviously reduce the level of risk involved with a third order.
A fourth Freedom class vessel might incorportate some features from the Oasis class to breath newlife into the design that dates back to the middle of the decade, wehen it was first unveiled as "Ultra Voyager," with a reference to the previous series of newbuildings of RCI.
Independence of the Seas, which was introduced in 2008, has operated an extended summer season from Southampton in the UK since delivery and starting in 2010/11, will remain in britain year-round. This indicates that a ship of this size can be employed with a greater choice of base ports than an Oasis class vessel. Assuming that the industry regains a path of solid growth in the future, an Oasis class vessel in Southampton could become possible.
The banking industry died first and committed suicide next as it gambled with sub-prime mortgages and financed other asset deals at hugely inflated prices, which then led to the infamous crash in 2007-08. Against this background, it may well be that RCCL will have to turn to the bond market rather than to its banks when it comes to raising - at least part - of the finance it needs to take delivery of Allure of the Seas.
In addition, Finnvera, the Finnish export credit institution that provided already part of the funding for Oasis, may well have to dig into its pockets for a second time. RCCL has financing in place for all the Celebrity Cruises' remaining newbuildings.
RCCL builds truly fine ships for both Celebrity and RCI. However, one question needs to be asked: are these in themselves excellent vessels cannibalising sales of cruises on other classes of ships of these two brands?
Still, it is also obvious to ask what next? In addition to Allure of the Seas, the second Oasis class newbuilding, the Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd (RCCL) group has three 122,000 gross ton newbuildings due for its Celebrity Cruises brand. Meanwhile, the Madrid-based Pullmantur subsidiary of the group seems to live a life of its own: ships are moved from one market to another and the future of the Croisieres de France brand remains in doubt, at least as far as rumours are concerned.
But let us go back to RCCL proper: an industry source says that talks are in progress over a possible third Oasis class ship as well as a fourth 158,400 gross ton Freedom class unit for RCI. An option for the fourth ship has been held at STX Europe in Finland for a long time.
What will hapeen in case of these two depends on two things, the source says. First one is price and the second one is what kind of risks RCCL shareholders are willing to take. The global economy appears to be regaining some health again, which is obviously good news. This combined with the hope that Oasis of the Seas will prove to be the success it is expected to be would obviously reduce the level of risk involved with a third order.
A fourth Freedom class vessel might incorportate some features from the Oasis class to breath newlife into the design that dates back to the middle of the decade, wehen it was first unveiled as "Ultra Voyager," with a reference to the previous series of newbuildings of RCI.
Independence of the Seas, which was introduced in 2008, has operated an extended summer season from Southampton in the UK since delivery and starting in 2010/11, will remain in britain year-round. This indicates that a ship of this size can be employed with a greater choice of base ports than an Oasis class vessel. Assuming that the industry regains a path of solid growth in the future, an Oasis class vessel in Southampton could become possible.
The banking industry died first and committed suicide next as it gambled with sub-prime mortgages and financed other asset deals at hugely inflated prices, which then led to the infamous crash in 2007-08. Against this background, it may well be that RCCL will have to turn to the bond market rather than to its banks when it comes to raising - at least part - of the finance it needs to take delivery of Allure of the Seas.
In addition, Finnvera, the Finnish export credit institution that provided already part of the funding for Oasis, may well have to dig into its pockets for a second time. RCCL has financing in place for all the Celebrity Cruises' remaining newbuildings.
RCCL builds truly fine ships for both Celebrity and RCI. However, one question needs to be asked: are these in themselves excellent vessels cannibalising sales of cruises on other classes of ships of these two brands?
Tuesday 13 October 2009
Time to think counter-cyclical ordering
In the years before the financial crisis and the recession that followed it, leading cruise shipping groups contracted new tonnage at a rate that had never been seen before - and it may indeed take a while before anything like that will happen in the future.
Right now, the orderbooks of shipbuilders like STX Europe and Fincantieri are thinning at a worrying rate, while Meyer Werft in Germany can enjoy a slightly longer spell of good workload thanks to contracts from Aida, Disney and Celebrity.
The current challenging economic climate will not last forever and there are strong signs coming from various parts of the world that indeed the worst should be over and leading economies should either have entered or enter to growth.
However, the cruise yards and a complex infrastructure of suppliers and contractors that complement the yards are facing tough times. While major business failures have been avoided so far, the conditions are becoming tougher almost by the day in the current drought of orders. There is little help to be expected from the cargo shipping sector - an excessive spree of orders has led to severe overcapacity in many sectors and owners are trying to cancel existing orders rather than to seek to place new ones.
It is vitally important that the infrastructure of yards, suppliers and contractors overcome the current lean times. Without that it will be very hard indeed to build a major cruise liner and it must take quite a bit of time and effort to re-establish such an infrastructure in case an existing network collapsed.
Therefore, some companies might do well for themselves and the industry as a whole by considering counter-cyclical ordering. Yes, freight volumes are low for ferry companies and ticket prices plus on board spending below the levels seen before 2007 in both ferry and cruise trades.
However, the cost of labour, equipment and raw materials must be well below those seen in the peak of the recent strong cycle. Interest rates are lower too and if companies can raise the required funding, they might save quite a bit of cash by ordering now rather than once a strong cycle is gathering momentum again with all its subsequent implications. Furthermore, delivery times of ships themselves plus vital components, such as main engines, which were very long only a couple of years ago, must be much shorter today.
A problem with shipping in general is the fact that it is cyclical to the extreme. The recent long, strong cycle led to a situation in which there were more than 11,000 ships of all types put together on order. some of the yards that were supposed to build them did not exist at the time and the downturn may well mean that many of them will not come into existence either.
So much the better: the world is not suffering from a shortage of ship building capacity. Combined with easy credit in those hectic pre-2007 days, excess shipbuilding capacity was in fact a major reason why the sector as a whole ended up in the mess in which it is today.
Passenger shipping, however, is very different. In the cruise industry, Carnival Corp & PLC alone controls about half of all beds on the market. Such degree of consolidation is unknown in other areas of shipping: Maersk Line only has 15% of the global container shipping capacity, by comparison.
In ferries, a couple of strong players usually share a market between them as these companies operate on regional rather than Europpe-wide let alone global level. Many ferries are old and ripe for recycling, so hopefully some owners will think outside of the box when it comes to ordering new tonnage and take up the counter-cyclical way.
Right now, the orderbooks of shipbuilders like STX Europe and Fincantieri are thinning at a worrying rate, while Meyer Werft in Germany can enjoy a slightly longer spell of good workload thanks to contracts from Aida, Disney and Celebrity.
The current challenging economic climate will not last forever and there are strong signs coming from various parts of the world that indeed the worst should be over and leading economies should either have entered or enter to growth.
However, the cruise yards and a complex infrastructure of suppliers and contractors that complement the yards are facing tough times. While major business failures have been avoided so far, the conditions are becoming tougher almost by the day in the current drought of orders. There is little help to be expected from the cargo shipping sector - an excessive spree of orders has led to severe overcapacity in many sectors and owners are trying to cancel existing orders rather than to seek to place new ones.
It is vitally important that the infrastructure of yards, suppliers and contractors overcome the current lean times. Without that it will be very hard indeed to build a major cruise liner and it must take quite a bit of time and effort to re-establish such an infrastructure in case an existing network collapsed.
Therefore, some companies might do well for themselves and the industry as a whole by considering counter-cyclical ordering. Yes, freight volumes are low for ferry companies and ticket prices plus on board spending below the levels seen before 2007 in both ferry and cruise trades.
However, the cost of labour, equipment and raw materials must be well below those seen in the peak of the recent strong cycle. Interest rates are lower too and if companies can raise the required funding, they might save quite a bit of cash by ordering now rather than once a strong cycle is gathering momentum again with all its subsequent implications. Furthermore, delivery times of ships themselves plus vital components, such as main engines, which were very long only a couple of years ago, must be much shorter today.
A problem with shipping in general is the fact that it is cyclical to the extreme. The recent long, strong cycle led to a situation in which there were more than 11,000 ships of all types put together on order. some of the yards that were supposed to build them did not exist at the time and the downturn may well mean that many of them will not come into existence either.
So much the better: the world is not suffering from a shortage of ship building capacity. Combined with easy credit in those hectic pre-2007 days, excess shipbuilding capacity was in fact a major reason why the sector as a whole ended up in the mess in which it is today.
Passenger shipping, however, is very different. In the cruise industry, Carnival Corp & PLC alone controls about half of all beds on the market. Such degree of consolidation is unknown in other areas of shipping: Maersk Line only has 15% of the global container shipping capacity, by comparison.
In ferries, a couple of strong players usually share a market between them as these companies operate on regional rather than Europpe-wide let alone global level. Many ferries are old and ripe for recycling, so hopefully some owners will think outside of the box when it comes to ordering new tonnage and take up the counter-cyclical way.
Tuesday 6 October 2009
Artemis - pioneering ship to change hands
P&O Cruises have sold their oldest ship, the 1984 built Artemis. At 44,588 gross tons, it is also the smallest unit in the fleet that will grow to seven units next year with the arrival of the 115,000 gross ton Azura in April - Artemis itself will continue to sail for the current operator until April 2011. That ship triggers mixed feelings when I think about its design concept and the execution of that concept.
When I took a cruise on Artemis in 2006, the ship did not impress. While the cabin accommodation was good, the ship's public rooms were just woefully inadequate to keep me happy for the 12 or so nights that I spent on board. There is a show lounge forward and a secondary lounge aft. In between a two-deck high atrium with a bar provided the only alternative to those two large, bland and boring principal public rooms on the same deck. The bar was cosy, but the seats so uncomfortable that relaxation was all but impossible.
An observation lounge at the foot of the funnel was slightly better, but even there a handrail was placed so that when I sat at a table close to the floor to ceiling windows, I could see the handrail rather than what was outside.
Although this is a personal opinion, and admittedly a rather unkind one towards the designers of the vessel, it is difficult to appreciate that way back in 1982 when the ship was ordered, it was hailed as the most forward looking cruise liner contracted so far.
The design itself was called All Outside Cabin or AOC for short - and created by a team of naval architects at the then Wartsila shipyards in Finland, which today are part of STX Europe. In previous designs, most cabins had been placed in the hull and thelowermost decks of the s uperstructure, while principal public spaces were located above these, together with a handful of luxury cabins.
In AOC, this was reversed upside down: cabins would go up and the principal public rooms find their way down, in case of Royal Princess as Artemis was first called, to the upermost deck in the hull. Consequently a quarter of the 600 or so cabins on the ship could have private balconies, an unprecedented figure.
AOC was first conceived as a 55,000 gross ton design, whose rounded strern bore striking resemblance to Song of America that Wartsila had delivered to Royal Caribbean in late 1982. Although the original design was never built, AOC set the benchmark for most cruise liners that have been built since then. A layout whereby a theatre is located forward, principal dining venue either aft on the same decks - or closer to midships on a lower deck - and a host of other public space in between these, usually on the uppermost deck in the hull and the one just above that, is the benchmark to which most cruise liners on order still today are built.
This demonstrates that the AOC concept itself was an excellent idea - indeed, it is tempting to guess whether the cruise industry could have staged the stellar rise it has enjoyed since the introduction of Royal Princess in 1984 and subsequent ships with lots of cabins with balconies had that concept not been introduced.
The early 1980s saw a flow of concept designs to flow from the offices of Wartsila. Sail Cruiser was a boutique sail cruise ship that emerged with Windstar, although the ships were built in France. SWATH or Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull used ideas from oil rigs and combined these with ones of the cruise industry, in 1992 a catamaran vessel called Radisson Diamond was built to this design. However, slow and with a deep draft, it was not a success.
Still, a feature from SWATH is now making headlines again: a large town square that cabin balconies face will be repeated in Oasis of the Seas and Allure of the Seas, the 225,000 gross ton giants of Royal Caribbean International.
AOC was an excellent concept, although Royal Princess / Artemis was not an impressive execution of that concept. SWATH has not been repeated since the single pioneer vessel that was anything but a success, but the town square part of the design may well become the next big think in cruise liner design.
And who knows, perhaps SWATH itself will get a second chance as a result!
When I took a cruise on Artemis in 2006, the ship did not impress. While the cabin accommodation was good, the ship's public rooms were just woefully inadequate to keep me happy for the 12 or so nights that I spent on board. There is a show lounge forward and a secondary lounge aft. In between a two-deck high atrium with a bar provided the only alternative to those two large, bland and boring principal public rooms on the same deck. The bar was cosy, but the seats so uncomfortable that relaxation was all but impossible.
An observation lounge at the foot of the funnel was slightly better, but even there a handrail was placed so that when I sat at a table close to the floor to ceiling windows, I could see the handrail rather than what was outside.
Although this is a personal opinion, and admittedly a rather unkind one towards the designers of the vessel, it is difficult to appreciate that way back in 1982 when the ship was ordered, it was hailed as the most forward looking cruise liner contracted so far.
The design itself was called All Outside Cabin or AOC for short - and created by a team of naval architects at the then Wartsila shipyards in Finland, which today are part of STX Europe. In previous designs, most cabins had been placed in the hull and thelowermost decks of the s uperstructure, while principal public spaces were located above these, together with a handful of luxury cabins.
In AOC, this was reversed upside down: cabins would go up and the principal public rooms find their way down, in case of Royal Princess as Artemis was first called, to the upermost deck in the hull. Consequently a quarter of the 600 or so cabins on the ship could have private balconies, an unprecedented figure.
AOC was first conceived as a 55,000 gross ton design, whose rounded strern bore striking resemblance to Song of America that Wartsila had delivered to Royal Caribbean in late 1982. Although the original design was never built, AOC set the benchmark for most cruise liners that have been built since then. A layout whereby a theatre is located forward, principal dining venue either aft on the same decks - or closer to midships on a lower deck - and a host of other public space in between these, usually on the uppermost deck in the hull and the one just above that, is the benchmark to which most cruise liners on order still today are built.
This demonstrates that the AOC concept itself was an excellent idea - indeed, it is tempting to guess whether the cruise industry could have staged the stellar rise it has enjoyed since the introduction of Royal Princess in 1984 and subsequent ships with lots of cabins with balconies had that concept not been introduced.
The early 1980s saw a flow of concept designs to flow from the offices of Wartsila. Sail Cruiser was a boutique sail cruise ship that emerged with Windstar, although the ships were built in France. SWATH or Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull used ideas from oil rigs and combined these with ones of the cruise industry, in 1992 a catamaran vessel called Radisson Diamond was built to this design. However, slow and with a deep draft, it was not a success.
Still, a feature from SWATH is now making headlines again: a large town square that cabin balconies face will be repeated in Oasis of the Seas and Allure of the Seas, the 225,000 gross ton giants of Royal Caribbean International.
AOC was an excellent concept, although Royal Princess / Artemis was not an impressive execution of that concept. SWATH has not been repeated since the single pioneer vessel that was anything but a success, but the town square part of the design may well become the next big think in cruise liner design.
And who knows, perhaps SWATH itself will get a second chance as a result!
Monday 14 September 2009
On dining with supposedly likely minded fellow passengers
"Dining with likely minded fellow passengers."
This line appears in so many cruise brochures that it must rank among the most repeated cliches of the industry. Well, every now and then you do meet interesting people at your dinner table and consequently, the conversation that follows can be interesting as well.
However, most of the time, the precise opposite is true. First of all, people are not chatting with each other but at each other, as somebody so well put it. How many cruises have I taken on this line before and how ship X compared with ship Y tend to rank among top opening lines in this chit chat, followed by how delightful is our six bedroom house in Kingston-upon-Thames.
Quite simply, the fact that a number of people have chosen the same ship for the same cruise does not mean that they have an awful lot in common.
I mostly cruise on my own and those holidays are time I dedicate for myself and do things that I want to do. Quite simply, I find very little appeal in the idea of spending two hours each night with the same people with whom I am not likely minded, listening to something that I have no interest in whatsoever.
Luckily, many lines and ships offer alternative dining options whereby you can escape all this. My preferred option is to have light dinner at the buffet on one night and then on some other book a table at a specialty restaurant. Yes, it will cost extra, but it is worth it!
Venues like Todd English on Cunard Line's Queen Victoria or Arcadian Rhodes on P&O Cruises' Arcadia that I have visited on my own have produced a truly enjoyable dining experience whereas the main dining room frequently has not.
In these little restaurants, you enjoy the attentive but not intrusive service of half a dozen or so people, the atmosphere is quieter, more peaceful and more pleasant than that of the huge main dining room. And last but not certainly least, you can have a table for yourself. There is no obligation to join a conversation or to be exposed to that of others, which is so very satisfying indeed. A holiday should be a holiday also from social engagements that you do not want to parttake.
All this turned even better when Carolyn, an American friend of mine, said that she takes a book with her to such restaurants when she goes on cruises on her own. The book acts as a perfect "companion" that allows you to divert your attention to something between the courses and even while enjoying one so that you can comfortably slow down and truly enjoy the meal.
I will be going on Queen Victoria again in December for a quick stint of four nights and look forward to going back to Todd English: it will be Me Time in My Space.
This line appears in so many cruise brochures that it must rank among the most repeated cliches of the industry. Well, every now and then you do meet interesting people at your dinner table and consequently, the conversation that follows can be interesting as well.
However, most of the time, the precise opposite is true. First of all, people are not chatting with each other but at each other, as somebody so well put it. How many cruises have I taken on this line before and how ship X compared with ship Y tend to rank among top opening lines in this chit chat, followed by how delightful is our six bedroom house in Kingston-upon-Thames.
Quite simply, the fact that a number of people have chosen the same ship for the same cruise does not mean that they have an awful lot in common.
I mostly cruise on my own and those holidays are time I dedicate for myself and do things that I want to do. Quite simply, I find very little appeal in the idea of spending two hours each night with the same people with whom I am not likely minded, listening to something that I have no interest in whatsoever.
Luckily, many lines and ships offer alternative dining options whereby you can escape all this. My preferred option is to have light dinner at the buffet on one night and then on some other book a table at a specialty restaurant. Yes, it will cost extra, but it is worth it!
Venues like Todd English on Cunard Line's Queen Victoria or Arcadian Rhodes on P&O Cruises' Arcadia that I have visited on my own have produced a truly enjoyable dining experience whereas the main dining room frequently has not.
In these little restaurants, you enjoy the attentive but not intrusive service of half a dozen or so people, the atmosphere is quieter, more peaceful and more pleasant than that of the huge main dining room. And last but not certainly least, you can have a table for yourself. There is no obligation to join a conversation or to be exposed to that of others, which is so very satisfying indeed. A holiday should be a holiday also from social engagements that you do not want to parttake.
All this turned even better when Carolyn, an American friend of mine, said that she takes a book with her to such restaurants when she goes on cruises on her own. The book acts as a perfect "companion" that allows you to divert your attention to something between the courses and even while enjoying one so that you can comfortably slow down and truly enjoy the meal.
I will be going on Queen Victoria again in December for a quick stint of four nights and look forward to going back to Todd English: it will be Me Time in My Space.
Tuesday 8 September 2009
Baltic ferry companies need to reinvent themselves
In the Port of Vaasa on the west coast of Finland, an old and rusty hulk of a ferry is waiting for demolition. In fact, it should have been scrapped a long time ago, but the Indian owners of the hulk and the Finnish environmental officials have a dispute over what to do with asbestos that is on board.
That hulk, now called C Express, was built in 1966 as Fennia and operated by Silja Line until the early 1980s. In its early days, it was regarded as an exceptionally fine vessel: after all, passengers had a heated indoor swimming pool, sauna, hairdressing salon, cinema and supermarket among the facilities on their disposal.
Compared to modern ferries, it was small, just 6,179 gross register tons as built, and its 299 berths were hardly adequate even in those long since gone days to cater for a maximum of 1,200 passengers it could take.
Still, the designers of Fennia had created the nucleus of cruise ferry: the ship itself should be an aspirational destination in itself. Gradually, but not without outright steps backwards, operators such as Silja Line and Viking Line developed the concept further. Ships became larger and offeed more choice in terms of bars and restaurants, but cinema and hairdressing salon have disappeared a long time ago from the to do list availble for cruise ferry passengers.
It is not unfair to say that what cruise ferries in the Baltic have today, Fennia had already 43 years ago. It was a benchmark design. And it is also not unfair to say that the ferry industry should create another Fennia - a vessel that brings something genuinely new to the disaposal of the passengers. The current concept is based on wining and dining - and largely self service.
The Baltic cruise ferry business saw its peak in the late 1980s before a recession in Finland and Sweden early in the next decade combined with a huge expansion of capacity by both two majors led to a crash in ticket prices. The aftermath of Estonia in 1994 and gradual increase in other affordable forms of travel negated the ferries the possibility to regain the position in the eyes of the public they enjoyed 20 years ago.
Every industry and every company needs to reinvent itself at some point. The cruise industry did so about 40 years ago and it has maintained the momentum: innovation that started from small first-generation purpose built cruise liners of that time continues with giants like Oasis of the Seas that offer facilities unthinkable all those decades ago.
The cruise ferry business in the Baltic presents a striking contrast: since the late 1980s, new ships have offered nothing really new and the business model of wining and dining itself has become tired.
Royal Caribbean International has started to operate cruises in the summer from Stockholm and obviously by doing so grasps part of the better-paying business from the ferry companies. The time time has come for the ferry companies to look at themselves with a critical eye and to regain the innovative thinking that was their hallmark from the late 1960s to the end of the 1980s.
Otherwise, their offering will become an increasingly cheap commodity that drfts down market in the eyes of the travelling public.
That hulk, now called C Express, was built in 1966 as Fennia and operated by Silja Line until the early 1980s. In its early days, it was regarded as an exceptionally fine vessel: after all, passengers had a heated indoor swimming pool, sauna, hairdressing salon, cinema and supermarket among the facilities on their disposal.
Compared to modern ferries, it was small, just 6,179 gross register tons as built, and its 299 berths were hardly adequate even in those long since gone days to cater for a maximum of 1,200 passengers it could take.
Still, the designers of Fennia had created the nucleus of cruise ferry: the ship itself should be an aspirational destination in itself. Gradually, but not without outright steps backwards, operators such as Silja Line and Viking Line developed the concept further. Ships became larger and offeed more choice in terms of bars and restaurants, but cinema and hairdressing salon have disappeared a long time ago from the to do list availble for cruise ferry passengers.
It is not unfair to say that what cruise ferries in the Baltic have today, Fennia had already 43 years ago. It was a benchmark design. And it is also not unfair to say that the ferry industry should create another Fennia - a vessel that brings something genuinely new to the disaposal of the passengers. The current concept is based on wining and dining - and largely self service.
The Baltic cruise ferry business saw its peak in the late 1980s before a recession in Finland and Sweden early in the next decade combined with a huge expansion of capacity by both two majors led to a crash in ticket prices. The aftermath of Estonia in 1994 and gradual increase in other affordable forms of travel negated the ferries the possibility to regain the position in the eyes of the public they enjoyed 20 years ago.
Every industry and every company needs to reinvent itself at some point. The cruise industry did so about 40 years ago and it has maintained the momentum: innovation that started from small first-generation purpose built cruise liners of that time continues with giants like Oasis of the Seas that offer facilities unthinkable all those decades ago.
The cruise ferry business in the Baltic presents a striking contrast: since the late 1980s, new ships have offered nothing really new and the business model of wining and dining itself has become tired.
Royal Caribbean International has started to operate cruises in the summer from Stockholm and obviously by doing so grasps part of the better-paying business from the ferry companies. The time time has come for the ferry companies to look at themselves with a critical eye and to regain the innovative thinking that was their hallmark from the late 1960s to the end of the 1980s.
Otherwise, their offering will become an increasingly cheap commodity that drfts down market in the eyes of the travelling public.
Tuesday 25 August 2009
Liverpool
Earlier this year, I made my first visit in Liverpool in the north west of England since 1996. Quite a bit had changed since then, the waterfront for which the city is well known had seen probably the biggest development in the dozen of years that separated my two visits.
A new cruise terminal had been built at the Pier Head. A terminal for Ferries 'Cross the Mersey - to cite a 1964 song by Jerry and the Pacemakers - had stood there from before. The new cruise terminal is a floating structure as the River Mersey is tidal: the difference between the high and low tide is several metres and the current really strong as the tides come and go.
Interestingly, the terminal is only geared to handle calling cruise ships, but no turn arounds. It lacks the facilities to check in passengers and their luggage and to store them once they have been offloaded after a cruise.
It may be difficult to add these features, because next to the terminal developers have built office blocks and good quality two hotels. It seems that there is, quite simply, not enough space to accomodate cars and coaches that inevitably arrive in large numbers whenever a cruise ship is embarking or disembarking passengers at a turn around.
On a positive side, the terminal is within a comfortable walking distance from the city centre and major sights, such as the Albert Dock and its museums and galleries. A new museum is being built on the Pier Head itself, just next to the ferry terminal and the Mersey Docks and Harbours Company head office.
Talking about the Albert Dock, I dropped in at the Merseyside Maritime Museum. However, the main building of the museum now housed a museum of slavery as well. Liverpool, like many other British seaports, made money on slave trade until 1833, when the British government abolished slavery in British colonies and dependencies.
What I saw did not impress.
As I experienced it, the exhibitions and in particular some videos that formed parts of the displays, seemed to support the view that Africa's current problems are only due to ills of the past.
It is not my intention to defend slavery: you cannot defend the indefensible, a crime against humanity.
However I experienced this particular museum as an attempt to stir up emotion in visitors, particularly so as writing blocks were placed there so that visitors could express their feelings about what they saw.
What purpose does it serve to comment on what happened more than 200 years ago? As for Africa's ills, of course slavery and slave trade were human tragedies on colossal scale. But the same goes for the genocide against Jews committed by Hitler. Yet nobody is arguing that Jews have become less entrepreneurial or successful after those horrors that took place only some 65 years ago.
When it comes to Africa, it seems that in many discussions outsourcing responsibility over the persistent underperformance of large parts of that continent is not only perfectly acceptable, it is the only politically correct approach to discuss the issue in public.
Soon after the visit to Liverpool, I bought a book called "The Trouble With Africa" by Robert Calderisi, a Canadian diplomat. In brief, he argues that Africa will only stop underperforming by abandoning its victim mentality.
I agree.
My native Finland was under Swedish rule from about 1155 to 1809 and then under the rule of Russia until 1917. This is far longer than any African country was under the rule of European colonial powers, yet whatever problems there are in Finland today, people do not blame the past for them.
Furthermore, I we want to judge our predecessors by writing down our feelings after visting a place like the said museum, we should accept that future generations will pass equal judgements on us. It was Oscar Wilde who said that a cynic is a person who knows the price of everything but not the value of anything. In my opinion, that describes our time well and Wilde's words could therefore act as the basis for such judgements in the future.
A new cruise terminal had been built at the Pier Head. A terminal for Ferries 'Cross the Mersey - to cite a 1964 song by Jerry and the Pacemakers - had stood there from before. The new cruise terminal is a floating structure as the River Mersey is tidal: the difference between the high and low tide is several metres and the current really strong as the tides come and go.
Interestingly, the terminal is only geared to handle calling cruise ships, but no turn arounds. It lacks the facilities to check in passengers and their luggage and to store them once they have been offloaded after a cruise.
It may be difficult to add these features, because next to the terminal developers have built office blocks and good quality two hotels. It seems that there is, quite simply, not enough space to accomodate cars and coaches that inevitably arrive in large numbers whenever a cruise ship is embarking or disembarking passengers at a turn around.
On a positive side, the terminal is within a comfortable walking distance from the city centre and major sights, such as the Albert Dock and its museums and galleries. A new museum is being built on the Pier Head itself, just next to the ferry terminal and the Mersey Docks and Harbours Company head office.
Talking about the Albert Dock, I dropped in at the Merseyside Maritime Museum. However, the main building of the museum now housed a museum of slavery as well. Liverpool, like many other British seaports, made money on slave trade until 1833, when the British government abolished slavery in British colonies and dependencies.
What I saw did not impress.
As I experienced it, the exhibitions and in particular some videos that formed parts of the displays, seemed to support the view that Africa's current problems are only due to ills of the past.
It is not my intention to defend slavery: you cannot defend the indefensible, a crime against humanity.
However I experienced this particular museum as an attempt to stir up emotion in visitors, particularly so as writing blocks were placed there so that visitors could express their feelings about what they saw.
What purpose does it serve to comment on what happened more than 200 years ago? As for Africa's ills, of course slavery and slave trade were human tragedies on colossal scale. But the same goes for the genocide against Jews committed by Hitler. Yet nobody is arguing that Jews have become less entrepreneurial or successful after those horrors that took place only some 65 years ago.
When it comes to Africa, it seems that in many discussions outsourcing responsibility over the persistent underperformance of large parts of that continent is not only perfectly acceptable, it is the only politically correct approach to discuss the issue in public.
Soon after the visit to Liverpool, I bought a book called "The Trouble With Africa" by Robert Calderisi, a Canadian diplomat. In brief, he argues that Africa will only stop underperforming by abandoning its victim mentality.
I agree.
My native Finland was under Swedish rule from about 1155 to 1809 and then under the rule of Russia until 1917. This is far longer than any African country was under the rule of European colonial powers, yet whatever problems there are in Finland today, people do not blame the past for them.
Furthermore, I we want to judge our predecessors by writing down our feelings after visting a place like the said museum, we should accept that future generations will pass equal judgements on us. It was Oscar Wilde who said that a cynic is a person who knows the price of everything but not the value of anything. In my opinion, that describes our time well and Wilde's words could therefore act as the basis for such judgements in the future.
Friday 21 August 2009
Ship design - the good present days and bad (quite) old days
Some 30 years ago, shipyards around Europe built several passenger vessels on which the cabins were placed forward in the superstructure and the public areas aft. The logic was that passengers could sleep in peace, without being exposed to noise from a nightclub or bar just above or below their cabin.
It sounded good.
However, in my view, that concept produced some of the worst ships in terms of passenger flow. Besides, these ships frequently lacked a Room With a View - forward, that is. By the time the 1977-built cruise ferry Finnjet entered service in may of that year, the concept had been firmly rooted in the minds of shipbuilders. Silja Line operated three French built 12,000 gross ton cruise ferries between Finland and Sweden that had entered service in 1975 and whose layout was based on this concept. Competitor Viking Line soon followed suit.
By the mid-198os, several companies had built cruise ferries along these lines, including Olau Line and TT-Line that operated in the North Sea and the soutern Baltic respectively. Like Finnjet, these were huge, boxy vessels in whose exterior design any consideration to aesthetic grace had been flushed down the toilet. Then, in 1982, Hapag-Lloyd's Europa became the most upscale ship to date built on this concept.
If you pile public areas on top of each other on three decks, which was the format with the said concept, you ask your passengers to trot up and down the stairs all the time and to queue for lifts. You also deny them a proper view forward, unless you e.g. have an observation lounge on top of the bridge, as was the case on Europa. Such a ship feels cramped, disjointed and irrational.
The 1970s and the early 1980s marked a low point in ship design. Before the Second World War, air conditioning was a luxury and therefore even fairly modest vessels, particularly on tropical routes, featured public rooms two decks high. From the 1950s onwards, such public spaces became increasingly rare as air conditioning took care of the pragmatic side of keeping passengers happy and at the same time, limiting deckheight kept the company accountants pleased with your design as well.
Even such great liners of the postwar era as United States (1952) or Michelangelo (1965) had nothing comparable to the greatest public rooms on pre-war ships: while one or two rooms could rise through two decks on each ship, the grandeur of the previous age was gone for good.
As the first cruise liners of the modern age entered service in the late 1960s, it was hard to envisage majestic public rooms on those vessels of 10,000 to 20,000 gross tons. They were small ships by liner-age standards and their design was based on entirely different premises from the liners. The modern cruise ships targeted middle-America and it was their tastes - or the lack of taste in some cases - that set the tone in design of their interiors.
Liners, meanwhile, had been manifestations of national pride and high culture. To some extent, ships like Italian Line's Michelangelo or France (1962) of the French Line succeeded quite well in conveying this ambition to the public, but this was hardly any more the case with Cunard Line's Queen Elizabeth 2 (1969). What had been hip and cool in the late 1960s was hopelessly out of fashion by 1994, when transformation of the ship to meet changing tastes was started in earnest.
I recall a visit to Eugenio C (1965), then flagship of what is Costa Crociere today, when the ship called at Helsinki in 1980. True, there were no public rooms two decks high. However, as you walked from an oval shaped first class lounge overlooking the bow towards the tourst class lido on the aft deck, you passed through a magnificent procession of public rooms. The ship had linoleum floors rather than carpets, so it did not look new. But the rooms and the furniture, desgned mainly by Nino Zoncada, presented timeless elegance and simplicity that aged gracefully indeed.
It would take a long time before designes of modern of cruise liners could boast with anything equally sophisticated and grand. P&O Cruises' Oriana (1995) certainly did that. You could say the same about the newbuildings of Celebrity Cruises that entered service in the middle of the same decade.
However, by then interior designers of cruise liners had finally come to appreciate that paying homage to what had gone before could work well in efforts to impress cruise passengers of today and tomorrow. In addition, they had come to appreciate the importance of deckheight as well: atria and soon other public spaces as well started to rise through two decks and more, creating a feeling of space where to breathe.
Most cruise liners that enter service today are much larger than the liners of the inter-war era and certainly hugely bigger than the first-generation cruise liners built 30-40 years ago. The size of the modern ships has allowed a liberal reintroduction of deckheight. The cabins forward-public space aft concept has long since been abandoned in the design of major passenger vessels.
In fact, in certain ways a modern ship like Celebrity Cruises' 122,000 gross ton Celebrity Equinox has far more in common with a great liner of the past like Ile de France (1927) than a first generation cruise liner: the moment you step on board, the ship's design makes a statement, has wow! effect. And that is exactly how it should be!
It sounded good.
However, in my view, that concept produced some of the worst ships in terms of passenger flow. Besides, these ships frequently lacked a Room With a View - forward, that is. By the time the 1977-built cruise ferry Finnjet entered service in may of that year, the concept had been firmly rooted in the minds of shipbuilders. Silja Line operated three French built 12,000 gross ton cruise ferries between Finland and Sweden that had entered service in 1975 and whose layout was based on this concept. Competitor Viking Line soon followed suit.
By the mid-198os, several companies had built cruise ferries along these lines, including Olau Line and TT-Line that operated in the North Sea and the soutern Baltic respectively. Like Finnjet, these were huge, boxy vessels in whose exterior design any consideration to aesthetic grace had been flushed down the toilet. Then, in 1982, Hapag-Lloyd's Europa became the most upscale ship to date built on this concept.
If you pile public areas on top of each other on three decks, which was the format with the said concept, you ask your passengers to trot up and down the stairs all the time and to queue for lifts. You also deny them a proper view forward, unless you e.g. have an observation lounge on top of the bridge, as was the case on Europa. Such a ship feels cramped, disjointed and irrational.
The 1970s and the early 1980s marked a low point in ship design. Before the Second World War, air conditioning was a luxury and therefore even fairly modest vessels, particularly on tropical routes, featured public rooms two decks high. From the 1950s onwards, such public spaces became increasingly rare as air conditioning took care of the pragmatic side of keeping passengers happy and at the same time, limiting deckheight kept the company accountants pleased with your design as well.
Even such great liners of the postwar era as United States (1952) or Michelangelo (1965) had nothing comparable to the greatest public rooms on pre-war ships: while one or two rooms could rise through two decks on each ship, the grandeur of the previous age was gone for good.
As the first cruise liners of the modern age entered service in the late 1960s, it was hard to envisage majestic public rooms on those vessels of 10,000 to 20,000 gross tons. They were small ships by liner-age standards and their design was based on entirely different premises from the liners. The modern cruise ships targeted middle-America and it was their tastes - or the lack of taste in some cases - that set the tone in design of their interiors.
Liners, meanwhile, had been manifestations of national pride and high culture. To some extent, ships like Italian Line's Michelangelo or France (1962) of the French Line succeeded quite well in conveying this ambition to the public, but this was hardly any more the case with Cunard Line's Queen Elizabeth 2 (1969). What had been hip and cool in the late 1960s was hopelessly out of fashion by 1994, when transformation of the ship to meet changing tastes was started in earnest.
I recall a visit to Eugenio C (1965), then flagship of what is Costa Crociere today, when the ship called at Helsinki in 1980. True, there were no public rooms two decks high. However, as you walked from an oval shaped first class lounge overlooking the bow towards the tourst class lido on the aft deck, you passed through a magnificent procession of public rooms. The ship had linoleum floors rather than carpets, so it did not look new. But the rooms and the furniture, desgned mainly by Nino Zoncada, presented timeless elegance and simplicity that aged gracefully indeed.
It would take a long time before designes of modern of cruise liners could boast with anything equally sophisticated and grand. P&O Cruises' Oriana (1995) certainly did that. You could say the same about the newbuildings of Celebrity Cruises that entered service in the middle of the same decade.
However, by then interior designers of cruise liners had finally come to appreciate that paying homage to what had gone before could work well in efforts to impress cruise passengers of today and tomorrow. In addition, they had come to appreciate the importance of deckheight as well: atria and soon other public spaces as well started to rise through two decks and more, creating a feeling of space where to breathe.
Most cruise liners that enter service today are much larger than the liners of the inter-war era and certainly hugely bigger than the first-generation cruise liners built 30-40 years ago. The size of the modern ships has allowed a liberal reintroduction of deckheight. The cabins forward-public space aft concept has long since been abandoned in the design of major passenger vessels.
In fact, in certain ways a modern ship like Celebrity Cruises' 122,000 gross ton Celebrity Equinox has far more in common with a great liner of the past like Ile de France (1927) than a first generation cruise liner: the moment you step on board, the ship's design makes a statement, has wow! effect. And that is exactly how it should be!
Friday 14 August 2009
Cruise & Maritime's focus on regional UK ports could work
Cruise & Maritime Voyages (CMV) is the name of a new kid on the block on the UK cruise market. The Dartford based company that has acted as general sales agent for Louis and Transocean, will set up a new operation next year and bring the 22,080 gross ton Marco Polo and the 17,600 gross ton Ocean Countess to the British market on year-round basis.
Marco Polo will be based in Tilbury near London, while Ocean Countess that was built in 1976 as Cunard Countess, will operate from a number of ports - Plymouth, Liverpool, Greenock, Leith, Newcastle and Hull.
Obviously, this will be an entry level operation, or a budget market one, if you so prefer. In the US, budget operators disappeared with the collapse of Premier Cruises in the aftermath of 911. Germany has traditionally been the stronghold of the operator that charters ships on contracts of various durations and terms and focuses on just the commercial side of the business.
Given the number and size of new ships that will enter service on the British market next year, CMV's move could be seen as daring. Celebrity Cruises will introduce the 122,000 gross ton Celebrity Eclipse; P&O Cruises their 116,000 gross ton Azura and Cunard Line the 90,000 gross ton Queen Elizabeth.
Well, there will be some deductions as well: Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines will decommission the 43 year old Black Prince in the autumn as will Saga Cruises their one year older Saga Rose. The two Ocean Village ships will migrate to Australia, so all the newcomers are not just net increase in the supply.
But then there are second hand arrivals as well: Saga Pearl II will join the Saga fleet in April and Thomson Cruises will introduce Thomson Dream, the present day Costa Europa the same month. So, prior to the CMV news, four ships were scheduled to leave and five to enter the British cruise market over the next 18 months. Now the number of newcomers has climbed to seven.
CMV say they want to offer a small ship experience and to bring their ships close to where people live, so that they do not need to travel to Southampton or Dover to join their cruise and make the journey in the opposite direction after their holiday is over.
It is probably here that CMV has a niche to captalise on: Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines and to some extent Saga Cruises have been among the very few operators that have sailed from regional UK ports. Thomson Cruises used to do this as well, but they will position all their six ships to the Mediterranean next year and fly passengers from various British airports to join them.
CMV and its German counterparts differ in a few significant ways from their failed US counterparts, such as Premier Cruises or the mid-1990s casualty called Regency Cruises. CMV and its counterparts firstly do not own their ships but they charter them, whereas the US lines mentioned earlier owned their ships too.
While CMV has not as yet published its 2010 itineraries, at least some of its cruises are long ones, in October Marco Polo will sail on a 32-night Caribbean return voyage from Tilbury. Premier and Regency competed head-on on the same seven-night markets as their significantly larger and stronger competitors.
That said, the UK market probably differs from the US one in that in Britain there are at least in relative to the size of the market more long cruises than in the US.
Still, the year 2010 promises to be an interesting one on the UK cruise scene: CMV's arrival will add 27,000 beds to the supply side. It may sound like much, but it is not really: Celebrity Eclipse alone adds 40,000 beds that the industry needs to sell next year.
Marco Polo will be based in Tilbury near London, while Ocean Countess that was built in 1976 as Cunard Countess, will operate from a number of ports - Plymouth, Liverpool, Greenock, Leith, Newcastle and Hull.
Obviously, this will be an entry level operation, or a budget market one, if you so prefer. In the US, budget operators disappeared with the collapse of Premier Cruises in the aftermath of 911. Germany has traditionally been the stronghold of the operator that charters ships on contracts of various durations and terms and focuses on just the commercial side of the business.
Given the number and size of new ships that will enter service on the British market next year, CMV's move could be seen as daring. Celebrity Cruises will introduce the 122,000 gross ton Celebrity Eclipse; P&O Cruises their 116,000 gross ton Azura and Cunard Line the 90,000 gross ton Queen Elizabeth.
Well, there will be some deductions as well: Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines will decommission the 43 year old Black Prince in the autumn as will Saga Cruises their one year older Saga Rose. The two Ocean Village ships will migrate to Australia, so all the newcomers are not just net increase in the supply.
But then there are second hand arrivals as well: Saga Pearl II will join the Saga fleet in April and Thomson Cruises will introduce Thomson Dream, the present day Costa Europa the same month. So, prior to the CMV news, four ships were scheduled to leave and five to enter the British cruise market over the next 18 months. Now the number of newcomers has climbed to seven.
CMV say they want to offer a small ship experience and to bring their ships close to where people live, so that they do not need to travel to Southampton or Dover to join their cruise and make the journey in the opposite direction after their holiday is over.
It is probably here that CMV has a niche to captalise on: Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines and to some extent Saga Cruises have been among the very few operators that have sailed from regional UK ports. Thomson Cruises used to do this as well, but they will position all their six ships to the Mediterranean next year and fly passengers from various British airports to join them.
CMV and its German counterparts differ in a few significant ways from their failed US counterparts, such as Premier Cruises or the mid-1990s casualty called Regency Cruises. CMV and its counterparts firstly do not own their ships but they charter them, whereas the US lines mentioned earlier owned their ships too.
While CMV has not as yet published its 2010 itineraries, at least some of its cruises are long ones, in October Marco Polo will sail on a 32-night Caribbean return voyage from Tilbury. Premier and Regency competed head-on on the same seven-night markets as their significantly larger and stronger competitors.
That said, the UK market probably differs from the US one in that in Britain there are at least in relative to the size of the market more long cruises than in the US.
Still, the year 2010 promises to be an interesting one on the UK cruise scene: CMV's arrival will add 27,000 beds to the supply side. It may sound like much, but it is not really: Celebrity Eclipse alone adds 40,000 beds that the industry needs to sell next year.
Thursday 13 August 2009
Norwegian Cruise Line's long path to recovery
Norwegian cruise Line (NCL)reported a 2Q09 net profit of $15.2 million earlier this week, much better than the $5.4 million it earned in the previous three months and a significant improvement from the $27.0 million loss the company had suffered a year earlier.
A lot of the recovery came from lower costs, but CEO Kevin Sheehan had something positive to say. Firstly, he belives that the decline in ticket prices has come to an and and the latest figures already indicated that people spend moreon board their ships than what they had done before.
So far so good!
NCL has had a rough ride in the recent past. The launch of NCL America, a US flag operation in the Hawaii islands that was meant to generate high returns as a year-round premium priced operation, did exactly the opposite.
This was not the first time the NCL management has had an issue of strategic nature on its plate, which has taken an awful lot of resources to sort out. In 1980, the intyroduction of SS Norway was hailed as a true coup and indeed for a while, it put NCL in the very forefront of the Caribbean cruise industry. That is, the SS Norway was there.
The ship was roughly of equal tonnage than the other four vessels of the company put together. If you think what Carnival Cruise Lines (CCL) or what is Royal Caribbean International (RCI) today did in that period, there is a marked difference to NCL.
CCL in particular increased the number of ships rather than the size of them in its early years. RCI was mare aggressive to grow the size of its vessels too - and still is - but as all their ships were designed and built for them , certain similarities could be retained in the ambiance of the fleet.
NCL's great leap forward negated it this possibility to gradual, step by step growth. As the industry developed, a pattern of success had become obviouys by the mid-1990s. You would need big ships to have economies of scale on the ship level and many, preferrably similar vessels to obtain the same on the corporate level.
Throughout the 1990s, NCL was left to compete against CCL and RCI with a fleeet that was falling further and further behind each time either competititor introduced a newbuilding. By the end of the decade the situation had become critical. With Norwegian Sky and Norwegian Sun NCL had its first modern, large vessels, but the fleet mainly consisted of old and small units that were no match in competition against CCL and RCI.
The NCL product had become a watered down version of that of their competition, which only added to the worries of the then top brass. The introduction of Freestyle Cruising by the company early this decade gave it spark that it had been lacking for a long time and all of a sudden, the NCL brand was fashionable again.
Today, it has a modern, consistent fleet and the revamped Freestyle Cruising product continues to provide a platform on which the company should be able to build its future success. Norwegian Epic, at 150,000 gross tons, is its sole newbuilding on order at the moment. It is far larger than any other ship in the fleet. There seems to be no indication that the newcomer would cannibalise sales of cruises on NCL's other ships.
Let us hope that it will not prevent future investment in ships - probably not of the same size as the Epic - that will help the company to grow without compromising flexibility in fleet deployment.
A lot of the recovery came from lower costs, but CEO Kevin Sheehan had something positive to say. Firstly, he belives that the decline in ticket prices has come to an and and the latest figures already indicated that people spend moreon board their ships than what they had done before.
So far so good!
NCL has had a rough ride in the recent past. The launch of NCL America, a US flag operation in the Hawaii islands that was meant to generate high returns as a year-round premium priced operation, did exactly the opposite.
This was not the first time the NCL management has had an issue of strategic nature on its plate, which has taken an awful lot of resources to sort out. In 1980, the intyroduction of SS Norway was hailed as a true coup and indeed for a while, it put NCL in the very forefront of the Caribbean cruise industry. That is, the SS Norway was there.
The ship was roughly of equal tonnage than the other four vessels of the company put together. If you think what Carnival Cruise Lines (CCL) or what is Royal Caribbean International (RCI) today did in that period, there is a marked difference to NCL.
CCL in particular increased the number of ships rather than the size of them in its early years. RCI was mare aggressive to grow the size of its vessels too - and still is - but as all their ships were designed and built for them , certain similarities could be retained in the ambiance of the fleet.
NCL's great leap forward negated it this possibility to gradual, step by step growth. As the industry developed, a pattern of success had become obviouys by the mid-1990s. You would need big ships to have economies of scale on the ship level and many, preferrably similar vessels to obtain the same on the corporate level.
Throughout the 1990s, NCL was left to compete against CCL and RCI with a fleeet that was falling further and further behind each time either competititor introduced a newbuilding. By the end of the decade the situation had become critical. With Norwegian Sky and Norwegian Sun NCL had its first modern, large vessels, but the fleet mainly consisted of old and small units that were no match in competition against CCL and RCI.
The NCL product had become a watered down version of that of their competition, which only added to the worries of the then top brass. The introduction of Freestyle Cruising by the company early this decade gave it spark that it had been lacking for a long time and all of a sudden, the NCL brand was fashionable again.
Today, it has a modern, consistent fleet and the revamped Freestyle Cruising product continues to provide a platform on which the company should be able to build its future success. Norwegian Epic, at 150,000 gross tons, is its sole newbuilding on order at the moment. It is far larger than any other ship in the fleet. There seems to be no indication that the newcomer would cannibalise sales of cruises on NCL's other ships.
Let us hope that it will not prevent future investment in ships - probably not of the same size as the Epic - that will help the company to grow without compromising flexibility in fleet deployment.
Sunday 9 August 2009
On nocturnal vigils and advances in passenger shipping
On the night to 31 July, I happened to wake up in the middle of the night.
Lying on my back, I gazed out through the windows that led to the balcony of my cabin: a huge cruise liner, with thousands of lights, was heading to the opposite direction. Quietly I got out of bed, put my glasses on and sneaked to the balcony door. I opened it as quietly as I could not to wake up Harvey, my travel companion. He is 6'1'', does bodybuilding and kickboxing and complains that I snore. Unfortunately, he is right: I do.
This time, however, he was fast asleep and I managed not to change that state of affairs. I opened the door to the balcony and stepped out: the huge cruise liner was either Grand Princess or Crown Princess, one of the two Post-Panamax ships Princess Cruises operates from Southampton this summer.
While standing there, a memory from the autumn of 1976 came back to my mind. In October of that year, I had travelled to visit my sister and her family who had recently moved to Stockholm in Sweden from our native Finland. On the way back, I had booked an outside cabin on the 8,523 gross ton Silja Line ferry Bore I (Bore is king of the north winds in Scandinavian mythology and thus does not refer to a dull person in this context).
I slept little that night as I wanted to see the lights of the ferries that were making a westbound crossing from Turku or Naantali, such as Silja Line's 1966 built Fennia of 6,397 gross tons. And when I did see any of these vessels, I thought that was a majestic sight.
And I was not alone: the next morning a retired couple, probably in their early seventies, were looking a cutaway drawing of Bore I. "An enormous thing this is, eight floors high," the old chap declared to his wife.
The brand new Celebrity Equinox, the vessel from which I watched the Princess Cruises' ship, measures about 122,000 gross tons and has about twice the number of decks - or floors - the Bore I had. Making any further comparisons would be utterly pointless.
Next morning in Southampton, docked in the port were P&O Cruises' Arcadia, the same company's Ventura and the other Princess Cruises' ship that trades out of the UK port this summer. Compare that with Marella (3,930 grt / 1970) or Viking 4 (4,485 / 1974) that would dock next to Bore I in Turku the October morning that followed my noctural vigil.
Passenger shipping has made such leaps forward in the past three decades that it is hard to believe how far the industry has come. Many insiders of the 1970s are probably equally surprised: in the summer of 1977, the then managing director of Cunard Line said that their new Cunard Princess of 17,586 gross tons might well be the last deep sea passenger vessel to be ever built.
In the depths of the gloominess that were the post-oil crisis 1970s, the statement did make sense. The recession that followed the events of 1973 stalled an expansion of the cruise industry that had started in the previous five or so years so that newbuilding activity really restarted first at the very end of the decade.
The current economic conditions are challenging as well. However, the cruise industry is now much better established on the marketplace than it was in the 1970s. Both in North America and in Europe - and mind you: increasingly so in Australia as well - cruising is a mainstream holiday option. This was not the case 35 years ago, when operators were both smaller and weaker than what they are today.
As the lights of the Princess ship gradually faded into the distance, I closed the door and slipped back into my bed past Harvey, still deep asleep. At the gentle age of 49, I would not spend all night waiting to see passing ships and their lights.
Lying on my back, I gazed out through the windows that led to the balcony of my cabin: a huge cruise liner, with thousands of lights, was heading to the opposite direction. Quietly I got out of bed, put my glasses on and sneaked to the balcony door. I opened it as quietly as I could not to wake up Harvey, my travel companion. He is 6'1'', does bodybuilding and kickboxing and complains that I snore. Unfortunately, he is right: I do.
This time, however, he was fast asleep and I managed not to change that state of affairs. I opened the door to the balcony and stepped out: the huge cruise liner was either Grand Princess or Crown Princess, one of the two Post-Panamax ships Princess Cruises operates from Southampton this summer.
While standing there, a memory from the autumn of 1976 came back to my mind. In October of that year, I had travelled to visit my sister and her family who had recently moved to Stockholm in Sweden from our native Finland. On the way back, I had booked an outside cabin on the 8,523 gross ton Silja Line ferry Bore I (Bore is king of the north winds in Scandinavian mythology and thus does not refer to a dull person in this context).
I slept little that night as I wanted to see the lights of the ferries that were making a westbound crossing from Turku or Naantali, such as Silja Line's 1966 built Fennia of 6,397 gross tons. And when I did see any of these vessels, I thought that was a majestic sight.
And I was not alone: the next morning a retired couple, probably in their early seventies, were looking a cutaway drawing of Bore I. "An enormous thing this is, eight floors high," the old chap declared to his wife.
The brand new Celebrity Equinox, the vessel from which I watched the Princess Cruises' ship, measures about 122,000 gross tons and has about twice the number of decks - or floors - the Bore I had. Making any further comparisons would be utterly pointless.
Next morning in Southampton, docked in the port were P&O Cruises' Arcadia, the same company's Ventura and the other Princess Cruises' ship that trades out of the UK port this summer. Compare that with Marella (3,930 grt / 1970) or Viking 4 (4,485 / 1974) that would dock next to Bore I in Turku the October morning that followed my noctural vigil.
Passenger shipping has made such leaps forward in the past three decades that it is hard to believe how far the industry has come. Many insiders of the 1970s are probably equally surprised: in the summer of 1977, the then managing director of Cunard Line said that their new Cunard Princess of 17,586 gross tons might well be the last deep sea passenger vessel to be ever built.
In the depths of the gloominess that were the post-oil crisis 1970s, the statement did make sense. The recession that followed the events of 1973 stalled an expansion of the cruise industry that had started in the previous five or so years so that newbuilding activity really restarted first at the very end of the decade.
The current economic conditions are challenging as well. However, the cruise industry is now much better established on the marketplace than it was in the 1970s. Both in North America and in Europe - and mind you: increasingly so in Australia as well - cruising is a mainstream holiday option. This was not the case 35 years ago, when operators were both smaller and weaker than what they are today.
As the lights of the Princess ship gradually faded into the distance, I closed the door and slipped back into my bed past Harvey, still deep asleep. At the gentle age of 49, I would not spend all night waiting to see passing ships and their lights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)